About your Search

20120925
20121003
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10
fighting a civil rights and virginia. we have a state where they want to go backward. the federal government can do a great job intervening in the delivery of recovery support services. meaning the federal dollars -- to me it would make sense to make them spend a small portion on recovery support services, to include housing. housing is a critical element in recovery. i guess my thought process goes -- somehow forced the state to discriminate against recovery, like they do in virginia, to spend some of the federal dollars on the offensive recovery support services. that is the nature of my thought process. by doing so, we can really reduce --, help recovery. to block out recovery people -- it is just insane to me. the state is not going to change. but the federal government if you just make a rule or regulation, you have got to spend a small amount of recovery and stop blowing it to agencies and virginia. i would be glad to elaborate after the press conference, of course. but that is the general thought and presidents. -- precedence. >> we have some programs that are specific arou
years but in virginia specifically not all states are equal. we still fight civil rights in virginia and we have a state where they want to go backward it appears. now the federal government is doing a great job intervening in the delivery of recovery support services, meaning those federal dollars the come from virginia. to me it would make sense to make them spend a small portion on recovery support services to include housing. housing is a critical missing element in recovery so i guess my thought process to samhsa and somehow force the state to discriminate against recovery like they do in virginia and spend some of those dollars on the authentic recovery and support service. that really is the nature of my thought process. by doing so we could really reduce the recidivism and increase recovery. the power to recover people is incredible and to block out the recovery principle from delivering those services, but like i say the state is not going to change but the federal government if you would just make a rule or regulation with those federal -- you have to spend a small amount o
win and my retort is if you look back over the years, from women's suffrage, civil rights, to more recently the alternative ener movement, have been borne from third parties garn hing enough votes away from the two major political parties so engrained in the status quo that they never impose the sweeping changes so i hope you can comment on the role of third parties not necessarily in winning elections but in changing the agenda to the point where we get the changes we end up treasuring over the next century. host: thank you for the call. dr. jill stein. guest: thank you for making that point, which is very important. in fact, what so many people call progress in this country, whether you talk about women getting the right to vote, the abbitionist slavery, the protection of workers in the workplace, the right to organize, the 40 hour work week, child labor laws, social social security, the new deal, you name it, all of these have come out of independent third parties, because as you say, the party that is are bought and paid for by large corporations which are part of the status qu
the alien torched statute. -- alien tort statute. any civil action by agent alien's right toward the only committed and a violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the united states, this is an old statute enacted by the first congress which sat dormant for 170 years. then some civil-rights folks pick them up and they started bringing cases in which the plaintiff is foreign, the defendant is foreign, and report to a place in some foreign place. they come into in new york federal court and say you have jurisdiction over this and courts have been allowing some of these cases to go forward, strange as it sounds. this case raised the question -- this takes place in nigeria and the guy says he mistreated me, tortured me and so forth. these foreign oil companies were composite and help the nigerian company do this to me -- these companies work implicit. you can actually sue incorporation under this statute and that was their claim last year. the u.s. supreme court heard arguments in the case and did something very unusual -- they actually said to the parties we want to consider a broader q
guaranteed act, on par with the civil-rights of the 1960's. host: john from illinois. caller: the only problem that i have is about the tax issue. the reason why i say that is our taxes in this country have never been set up to be fair. what they were set up for was that the rich were supposed to pay the majority of their taxes in federal taxes. working-class and the port were supposed to pay the majority of theirs in homeowners' taxes, city and state taxes -- ordering class and the poor. everything is out of sorts. when you are on fixed income and these states will have to have such a high tax rate because the federal government will have such a lower one. anybody i fixed tax rate goes in and buys a refrigerator that costs $400, will have about a $100 tax on the refrigerator. that is the problem. the ones it will hurt our people that are retired, people that are on disability, things like that. otherwise, i am completely in line with you. i voted for ron paul in 1988. i voted for paul brown. i think he -- i can remember what year it was that he ran as a libertarian. once.ed for ross p
with the civil-rights of the 1960's. host: john from illinois. john is an independent. hey there. caller: the only problem that i have is about the tax issue. the reason why i say that is our taxes in this country have neverwhat they were set up for was that the rich were supposed to pay the majority of their taxes in federal taxes. working-class and the port were supposed to pay the majority of theirs in homeowners' taxes, city and state taxes -- ordering class and the poor. everything is out of sorts. when you are on fixed income and these states will have to have such a high tax rate because the federal government will have such a lower one. anybody i fixed tax rate goes in and buys a refrigerator that costs $400, will have about a $100 tax on the refrigerator. that is the problem. the ones it will hurt our people that are retired, people that are on disability, things like that. otherwise, i am completely in line with you. i voted for ron paul in 1988. i voted for paul brown. i think he -- i can remember what year it was that he ran as a libertarian. i voted for ross perot once. i am
with civil rights of the '60s. >> host: john is from illinois now. john is an independent. hi there. >> caller: hi. mr. johnson, the only problem i have is about the tax issue. and the reason why it's like -- the reason why i say that is, our taxes in this country have never been set at actually to be fair. what they were set up for originally was that the rich were supposed to pay the majority of their taxes in federal taxes, and the working class and the poor were supposed to pay most of -- the majority of theirs in home owners taxes, city and state taxes. and that has been all -- it's got everything out of sorts. my problem with what everybody calls a fair tax is, when you're on a fixed income, and these states are going to have to have such a high tax rate because the federal government is going to have such a lower one, that when anybody that is on a fixed tax rate goes in and buys a refrigerator, they cost $400, the lowest one they can buy, they have about $100 tax on the refrigerator. that is the problem. and the only ones it's going to hurt is people that are retired, people
that blatantly went the wrong way because of a ref's call. our most important civil-rights is voting. it is what everything else relies on. this is not a casual thing. even if it does not turn an election. in a state that is solidly blue or solidly red -- whether or not it changes the outcome. as with the nfl refs, it did get settled very quickly after everybody on national television saw a game go the wrong way, and, tragically, it may take something like that for voter i.d. and voter suppression to get the attention it deserves. >> michael onesteel joined in. -- michael wants to join in. >> i have no idea what the right percentage should be, but it is under 1%. another topic that is way down that we believe should be more of the coverage is money in politics, the fund raising. it is just a sliver of the percentage. one of the things we are trying to do with our project is to bring awareness to these types of issues from a data perspective, so it is not just anecdotal. i think we all know about it, but is it being given enough percentage of coverage is i think a legitimate question. >> or what
and having been in charlotte, a great civil-rights city, where the students from the historical black college in 1960 set up a lunch counter in to grant them and yet, what do we see today? state after state, efforts to suppress voting rights instead of expanding them. not enough people vote in this country. in pennsylvania, there is legislation now on the books that could disenfranchise between 750,000-1 million people. president obama won by 600,000 boats in pennsylvania last time. this really does determine the election. i don't care who you are for. this will determine the election. it is a huge problem or the country. we should be celebrating voters going to the polls, not putting impediments in their way. host: the radio program " democracy now" turns 25 this year? guest: we started in 1996. we were just on radio. the week of september 11, 2001, we started on the first television station in new york city on public access. then it just caught on like wildfire. beyond the election and more television stations aired us and radio stations and npr stations and pbs stations all over the countr
. i analyzed the situation to determine where it needed to be done and did the right thing. i think that that can happen. i think that by working together, that by being civil, you know, you have not seen any attack ads run by me. there have been attack ads run in this campaign, but not endorsed by me. i think that by partisanship is called for and can be accomplished, and i will work to do that. [applause] >> mr. plummer? >> absolutely. what i said i and my opening statements was true. the voters are hurting. they do not care if they are -- if you are republican or democrat. our farmers are struggling through one of the worst seasons they have ever seen. i announced this week that i would call for a discharge petition against leadership because they need a farm bill. there are some very serious policy issues out there now. is this right for southern illinois? there are a lot of issues that are not. obama care is bad. cap and trade is bad. the dream act is bad. i will not stand up for those issues, pushed by republican or democrat. the fact that the farm bill is not happening right
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10